ABSTRACT

An umbrella study, consisting of two university samples (N = 196), examined mock jurors’ decisions after being presented with a trial summary (and accompanying audio) about the murder of the defendant’s wife and neighbor. As part of the simulated trial, jurors were asked to disregard incriminating, but unreliable, wiretap evidence from a judge who was male or female. When the judge simply admonished jurors to disregard the evidence, participants in the female judge condition were more likely to rate the defendant as guilty compared to the male judge condition, suggesting the former considered the inadmissible evidence more. However, this pattern was reversed when, in addition to the disregard instruction, an collaborative explanation for why one should disregard the evidence was provided: specifically, participants in the female judge condition rated the defendant as less guilty than those in the male judge condition. These findings suggest that gender-congruent behaviors (i.e. female judge providing a collaborative explanation) by an individual occupying an incongruent social role may elevate that individual’s level of authority.

摘要

一项伞形研究，由两个大学样本 ( N = 196），在收到有关谋杀被告妻子和邻居的审判摘要（和随附的音频）后检查了模拟陪审员的决定。作为模拟审判的一部分，陪审员被要求无视来自男性或女性法官的有罪但不可靠的窃听证据。当法官简单地告诫陪审员无视证据时，与男性法官相比，女性法官条件下的参与者更有可能将被告定为有罪，这表明前者更多地考虑了不可接受的证据。然而，当除了无视指令外，还提供了一个关于为什么应该无视证据的合作解释时，这种模式被逆转了：特别是，女性法官条件下的参与者对被告的评价低于男性法官条件下的被告。这些发现表明，扮演不一致社会角色的个人的性别一致行为（即女性法官提供协作解释）可能会提升该个人的权威水平。